Value of this info to terrorists

While I am opposed to the US military presence in Iraq, I was just wondering what value this information would have for the enemy, since it is now in the public domain.

A lot of the stuff that's novel here is probably already well known there. It takes a matter of days for information about new weapons and tactics to go out, if I recall correctly. It might provide a slight edge to know which unit had which weapons, but is it better than what you could learn by going for a walk in the neighborhood in Baghdad?

This is not "info for terrorists". The biggest "terrorists" in Iraq are the US and British Army. We, as citizens, should even support and help the the Iraqi people to defeat and bring down the invaders. And please be aware that I do not refer to the killing of innocent people in Iraq (which happens and is perpreted by both sides: the US/UK and non-US/UK). I refer to the guerrillas that attack only the US/UK army. They exist, they are the ones who detonat IED to aniquilate the invaders. It is those that we should support. SeiteNichtGefunden 15:29, 11 November 2007 (GMT)

Using the "Assists our enemies" line of reasoning can be extended to this:

"We should not put successful murderers on trial because their methods will become public and may incite other people to copy them."

or, using a different interpretation:

"In the same way that I should know if medicine I pay for is bad for me, I should know if the wars I pay for aren't going so well. It's my money and whether I like it or not, my war. I should have a right to see where my money is going and what my money is doing."

The value to the terrorists is that when combined with the associated units and all of their equipment it lets folks know the exact numbers of troops and supplies that a particular unit has. If you attack someone, the most valueable information is knowing exactly what your up against.

Seite, why don't you go over there and join up with AlQueda, I'll put in a good word on your behalf to the US and UK forces so they can find you...

Seite, you're talking about human beings. Last time I checked, the United States and UK were not beheading foreign nationals, or terrorizing their own populations based on religious differences.

SEITE: you can show up in Iraq anytime you get that lucky feeling. Home boy over there as got something for your shnizzle eating ass. What a hypocrite! Your living the freaking good life because somebody gave a damn about your country 60 years ago - and was willing to pony up a few trillion to bring your fatherland back from ashville. Keep the change A-hole!

Move Picture

Seriously. It's smashing the lead paragraph and completely ruining the ease of reading it, especially on monitors that aren't the latest and greatest (that is, mine). Plus, it's just not goddamn relevant. The picture belongs in the article; it doesn't belong CROWNING the article. It's not "robots!!!!", it's "military equipment in Iraq".

^ get a better monitor, it looks perfectly aligned on mine, which is not the latest nor the greatest.

CS GAS?

Which every police department around the worlds owns? And this article thinks it equals = Illegal chemical weapons? The world is fool of fools. hmm

There is a world of difference between dry CS gas and wet CS gas.
The physiological properties had been discovered already by the chemists first synthesising the compound in 1928: "Physiological Properties – Certain of these dinitriles have the effect of sneeze and tear gases. They are harmless when wet but to handle the dry powder is disastrous. (sic)" (Corson BB, Stoughton RW (1928). "Reactions of Alpha, Beta-Unsaturated Dinitriles". J Am Chem Soc 50: 2825–2837. doi:10.1021/ja01397a037)
Yes, nearly every major city police station in the world has CS gas as a crowd control agent, but dry CS is a whole different beast. (production of wet CS gas entails dissolving the active substance, which is solid, in a solvent, typically an alcohol. Dry CS gas is nearly pure, and is delivered as a powder, drastically increasing permanent effect.)
All of this, of course, is irrelevant in consideration of CS gas as an illegal chemical weapon, as according to the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, riot control agents are prohibited for use in military action, as they pose a severe potential to cause escalation. Namely, even if it were just plain 'ol tear gas we were using (as wet cs gas is), there would still be a violation of the CWC, signed by the United States.

Misleading Commentary?

In the section about Portable Chemical stations, the author points out the irony of portable biological and chemical stations being in Iraq after that was a justification for the invasion. This is misleading in my opinion. I looked up the LIN # (C07506) and it turns out that they are "CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL PROTECTIVE SHELTER['s]."[1] This seems kind of wild to call them mobile chemical and biological production facilities. Besides, the United States makes all of its WMD stateside with impunity and without fear of them being blown up if they don't move around. 1.0.22.53 01:50, 20 February 2008 (GMT)

They were't. They were called "portables". But you're right. Perhaps the extra clarification should be made.

The biological weapons facility you have listed is organized under a medical unit and a brigade support battalion. These are systems used in decontamination from chemical or biological weapons, or creating a "safe area" during an attack, they have no other purpose or capability. I am not going to take the time to give you a reference, since if you did your research to begin with, I wouldn't have to send this message. I'll leave it up to you to refute my statement with fact. If these were chemical weapons manufacturing facilities, I guarantee you the military would pay more than US$622,051 each for them.

Price comment

I think it's important to note, on the subject of prices, that these were not necessarily expenditures, nor are they necessarily used up by their use in Iraq. Looking at the list of equipment by price, I note the M1A1 as the third item in the list; production of the M1A1 stopped in 1992 and was replaced by the M1A2. The M1A1s listed for use in Iraq were not purchased for use there. They were all purchased over 15 years ago and most of them will be used after Iraq. The list gives an idea of the value of equipment which is in Iraq, which is both interesting and important, but which should be distinguished from the amount of equipment purchased for or used up in Iraq. TomTheHand 12:17, 22 May 2008 (GMT)

The list is of Theatre Provided Equipment (TPE), so its puchased for, or recycled for Iraq.

Theater provided equipment means that one unit brought the items with them and left them for the next unit to use so that the government did not have to purchase the same equipment for multiple units. Kind of like a construction company who provides tools for all of the workers to share. Another thing your report does not look at is the historic price of the equipment vs todays market price. The prices have gone up considerably on much of the equipment since the beginning of the war. The prices listed are what it would cost if you had to replace an item, not what the government actually paid for the items.

You really need to know what you are talking about. You have it pretty wrong.

There are so many inaccuracies in this report. This kind of negligible report that displays so much inaccurate info is so wrong. It points out a LIN that has BIOLOGICAL TENT, those are tents that are used as DECON apparatus in case troops are attacked by chemical weapons. Chemical weapons have been used against the US numerous times in recent years by local jihadists who use Clorox in the home made bombs, nerve gas was even used accidently once in Bagdad by an Iraqi who unknowingly got hold of one round to use as a weapon, sickening four troops. CS gas the US has is no different than riot control gas the Police back home uses. It's non lethal by all means. It just makes you cough and it's very very legal. Get all your facts right and know what you are talking about. All the info that is leaked in this report is in grave danger to your brothers and sisters serving over here. If you let the enemy know what the hell we have they know how to fight us. It does no one any good to leak this crap.

You don't know what your talking about. Read the report.

Read the reply to the person above you for reasoning on CS gas in Iraq.

non-lethal" chemical weapons deployed in Iraq

CS gas is used as a riot control agent in the US by all levels of law enforcement. It is also used in the US military as a training aid. I've been in the CS chamber many times without a mask, in fact, I'm scheduled to go into the chamber again in October as we prepare to deploy to Iraq. You're discovery that the US is using "non-lethal" chemical weapons in Iraq is an alarmist statement designed to appeal to the bottom-feeders that buy into your ignorant world view. God, I feel sorry for your kind.

I think everyone visiting this website feels kind of sorry for you and "your kind" going into a gas chamber voluntarily. Then again I am pretty sure in your ignorant world view this is your personal sacrifice to bring democracy and freedom to this world? Poor soul, leaves to wonder who is being fed from the bottom here.

One more addition: it might be worthwhile to read up on the long-term effects of CS gas on heart, liver and lungs. Talking about "enclosed space" i.e. your gas chamber, you might want to have a look at http://www.zarc.com/english/tear_gases/jamateargastoxic.html. Not that I personally would give a lot about the health of "your kind" but after all you deserve to know and I am pretty convinced your Army doesn't tell you this side of the story.

And as usual: just because something is done in your country, which is sad enough, doesn't justify it to be done elsewhere. And after all there is an international treaty forbidding the use of CS gas in any context of warfare. And for sure not without a reason. So this case indeed is pretty crystal clear. Go and do your homework before trying to discredit others. 1.0.22.53

Some facts and lots of Fiction to fill in the Gaps

One word summary of this report. BULLDUNG. WikiLeaks is Laughable.

I mean really, how can you NOT know the difference between a CHEMICAL DECONTAMINATION trailer (A HUGE SHOWER AND SCRUB DOWN UNIT) and a CHEMICAL PRODUCTION FACILITY?

Hello World! Come here and read if you dont know ANYTHING and you want leave LESS informed than before!

LMAO

As a former member of one of the units listed on your list, I must say that you guys are bunk. Your property list is inaccurate, and your designation of the unit is wrong as well, which leads me to believe that you are most likely inaccurate about some or most of the other units. To prove what I am talking about, I was a member of A co 1-5 Cav (WAGLA0) and we most certainly were not an air defense unit. And I can personally tell you that Any "chemical" equipment that we had on our books was strictly for Decontamination purposes only.....you need to do a little more in depth research before you go posting your "leaks". Your credibility is questionable at best.

Honestly?

Check your sources. I am a member of one of the units posted here, and we're definitely -not- what your 'source' labeled us as. Great job trying to betray your country and failing so utterly. Rot in Hell.